Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Final Fantasy/To do

This discussion page is part of WikiProject Final Fantasy. Click here to start a new discussion.
This discussion is for the To do list. Please direct all discussion on pending tasks to here, to leave the main page for list only.

An archive of the old to do list can be found here.

General discussion

Archive?

Do we really need an archive? I mean, I've looked at ways these pages can be archived and it seems a bit pointless. I mean, who needs an archive for a To do list? Maybe we should just keep to the 30-day-removal idea, eh? — CuaHL ☺ 00:46, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, we need the archive. The entire rationale for merging the Al Bhed page is there and so are the ones about Shuyin, Lenne, Sphere Break, List of FFX characters and 10 px pictures,... I don't want to rehash the same discussion over and over, do you ? We need to have a history of the project's decisions and the archive is it for now. Unless you are volunteering to write one ? Renmiri 17:39, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To be expanded

To be improved with images

Added an edited Beastmaster Sprite to the appropriate location in the article. Hope that's alright? Tell me if it's not good. ShiraShira 23:29, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To be standardised

To be improved

To be created

To be merged

→ List of Final Fantasy X-2 characters

If there is enough info that can be in the article about Shuyin, he deserves his article. By enough info, be certain that this is not fancruft material, but realy encyclopaedic material. Also, plot summary should be relatively short, not a whole article. I just suggested that we may discuss on the project's talk page about which characters deserve their own article.--DarkEvil 23:10, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I really hesitate to frame this as a question of whether or not something can be in an article, when it should be a question of whether or not something should be in an article. But that's just me being linguistically pedantic :-). The Shuyin article is currently a mess, regardless. It doesn't need to duplicate so much of the Final Fantasy X-2 story section, and could probably be cut down to less than half its current size simply by deleting redundancies and tightening the prose. If nothing else, it should at least be divided into sections, as the current huge block of text is a little daunting. And I second DarkEvil's suggestion that we bring this up on the main project talk page, not just regarding these articles, but as a general policy issue. – Seancdaug 04:05, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Lenne has been merged. Deckiller 23:47, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shuyin, Nooj and Gippal have been merged. Ryu Kaze 01:16, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

→ Al Bhed

This page was merged last month as part of the cleanup and has now been restored by Kappa unilateral decision. Should we merge it again ? Renmiri 23:32, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but be careful and don't go overboard with trimming. I'm a mergist, but I'm starting to fear that we're going to lose key information if we're not careful in our merges. Deckiller 23:34, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But what about Kappa ? Renmiri 23:35, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the end, you may just have to end up merging a very large entry -=shrugs=-. Deckiller 23:39, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh this is where it's being discussed. Please don't attempt to merge the Al Bhed language stuff, it doesn't belong on a list of races. Kappa 23:47, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Continued on the Talk:Al Bhed#Merge with Races of Final Fantasy Renmiri 15:06, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

→ 1000 words

About 1000 Words (Final Fantasy X-2), does anyone think they can put enough into an individual article? I think it may be worth merging with either FFX-2 or Yuna. Anand 01:18, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I vote for Yuna — CuaHL 22:19, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I kind of think it would fit better in Final Fantasy X-2, myself, since it basically serves as the theme song for the game. It can probably be placed into the music section without much editing, too. – Seancdaug 03:17, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Sean Renmiri 15:03, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merged to FFX2 Renmiri 23:15, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

→ Final Fantasy VI soundtracks

Renmiri, I'm confused: I only see five articles about the soundtrack albums (Final Fantasy VI: Original Sound Version, Final Fantasy VI: Grand Finale, Final Fantasy VI: Piano Collections, Final Fantasy VI: Special Tracks, and Final Fantasy Anthology - Music From FFV And FFVI). Were these the articles you're talking about? As for merging them: yeah, I think it's probably a good idea (I'd say it would be better to create a new article, though, rather than to merge them all into an existing article – something like Final Fantasy VI albums, maybe?). It might make more sense to merge the Anthology album article into Final Fantasy Anthology though, since it includes tracks from multiple games, and, unlike the other discs, was released as part of the game itself. – Seancdaug 02:18, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That is what I meant Renmiri 03:43, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

→ Bestiary

I think having 3 alphabetized sub-sections for a list that will be deliberatly left imcomplete is very misleading and increases the ammount of work for edits. All 3 of the subpages said the bestiary had a full list of creatures which [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Final Fantasy/To do/Archive 1#Articles that could be improved with images is not true] apparently due to earlier project decisions. I had to edit 4 places instead of just 1. The resulting page would not be bigger than the Races page which has 35 races. Renmiri 04:23, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is, combining the three pages would result in an article roughly 90 KB in size, which is well in excess of the recommended lengths established by WP:SIZE (which says that articles in excess of 50 KB should usually be split: by comparision, the races article is 42 KB, which is long, but still only about half the size of a hypothetically combined bestiary). Intellectually, the three articles belong together, but creating a single article of that size is a bad idea. Short of mercilessly editing out over half of the info in the bestiary (which may not be a bad idea, necessarily), they should probably stay seperate out of courtesy to the technical considerations of WP:SIZE. – Seancdaug 05:46, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not really. A straight merge gave me 68 KB, which I easily paired it down to 60 KB here. I'm sure we can find more to cut and get it to 50 KB if this is a must Renmiri 18:03, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why not split it over two pages... Final Fantasy bestiary and Final Fantasy bestiary (N-Z)/Final Fantasy bestiary (continued) — CuaHL 22:45, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify my reasoning a bit further.. squashing the article into one leaves no room for further additions. Which is inevitable — CuaHL 22:48, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, damn me for an amateur, Renmiri: you're right. If we can manage to cut it back to < 50KB with a reasonable degree of consensus, and we can find some procedure of allowing for possible future additions, then I have no problem with the merger. – Seancdaug 22:51, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm forced to agree with you two. Merging it all in one page will make it too close to the limit and make it hard to include new beasts. It should stay as 2 or 3 pages. It does need some work though, right now it looks awful! ~~

→ Sphere Break

Considering SB is much less notable than Shuyin, Al Bhed and 1,000 words, a song that spents half of 2003 in the top charts , I see no reason to have a page just for it. If we keep it, then we should consider bringing some of the other merged pages back as well. It is a fairly recent page. See discussion on Miscellany below Renmiri 23:26, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

→ ATB, CTB, ADB

I think CuaHL's suggestion to merge these three articles has merit, and I would support a merge into Role-playing battle systems, as a summary of these already exists there. I wouldn't be entirely agreeable to a merge of these into a new Final Fantasy battle systems article, as ATB and CTB are no longer exclusive to Final Fantasy games. Then again they're also okay as they are now... ~ Flooch 09:32, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

→ FFTA character classes and Gambler character class

I've been working on a combined article for all of the FFTA character classes in my sandbox for a little while. I promise to have it up soon. By the end of this weekend. I swear. Gambler? Kill it with fire. I had no idea it was still floating out there. -RaCha'ar 18:30, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okiedoke, List of jobs in Final Fantasy Tactics Advance has been created. Mergeto tags have been slapped on all the existing articles. Give it a week then we'll make the existing ones redirects. -RaCha'ar 06:04, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To be NPOV

Final Fantasy X-2#Criticism was pretty biased but has improved. Has it been improved enough to qualify as NPOV ? Renmiri 00:33, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The writing seems acceptably even-handed, but I think, as a general rule, it's even more important than normal to ensure that every claim we make in a criticism section is drawn from a cited source. It strikes me as the only way to ensure the section remains NPOV in the long haul. But beyond that comparatively minor point, it's looking good. – Seancdaug 03:05, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Do we need a Criticism section ? FFX does not have it and the game is not new anymore. I see no point on putting a borderline POV section like that for a 2002 game Renmiri 23:28, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Miscellany

→ Thumbnail Images on List of Final Fantasy X-2 characters

I went to great lengths and effort to put a picture of every character listed on the list of characters. I believe it enriches the page.
- Originally the images where just as links like this (img) and there were no complaints. But I was forced to actually show the image as a tiny thumbnail because the Wiki robot that scans for unused images can not handle image links.
- Now user 85.220.108.113 has decided tha the pictures are annoying and has taken the unilateral decision of removing them all. This is not just a matter of taste. Removing the thumbnails will cause the deletion of over 40 images by the Wiki robot that scans for unused images, in the next 7-10 days.
- Before those images are lost I wanted to make sure everyone agrees with 85.220.108.113 and that the removal is what the project team wants. Don't count on me to reload them, tag them properly and place them in the page. I did it more than once, to avoid the darn robot. It was way too much work. I hate to see my efforts deleted like that so I will not be reloading any image. I did my part, now its a matter of people valuing it or letting it go to the trash bin Renmiri 23:27, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I acknowledge the time and trouble you went to, generating and uploading all those images; I'm not sure Wikipedia articles are the best place for them though - mainly down to fair use considerations. And to be honest, those little black spots scattered throughout the article are somewhat unusual, to say the least. >Gamemaker 00:18, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't blame me, blame the Roomba programmer that doesn't want to fix his code. I had it as inline links wich is what the fair use police told me to do. Alas, Roomba ignores in-line links and tags the images as orphans Renmiri 01:09, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Might as well add the other List of characters List of Final Fantasy X characters to the debate, since it has thumbnails too Renmiri 01:50, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I concur with Gamemaker. They are unusual, in that by definition, a thumbnail should "make it easier to scan and recognize" their subject matter. Maybe we can find temporary a home for these images, with a page like Images of sheep? Flooch 04:47, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think these pictures should stay. They're only ten pixels, they don't get in the way nor make the article look ugly, and they actually promote Square-Enix, so I don't see why they would be upset with the images. ⇒ JarlaxleArtemis 03:18, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I think (probably not surprisingly, to those who've been following my other statements on the matter) that this playing a little fast-and-loose with copyright policy: leaving aside that the number of these mini-thumbnails are well in excess of the fifteen image limit, using them in this way really isn't keepin in line with the requirement that all images be used to illustrate a particular point in the article: at this size, they don't really look like anything other than mutant punctuation. I really am loathe to suggest we lose the images, as I know how much time Renmiri spent uploading them, but I don't believe that the current approach is going to be workable in the long-term, and I'd rather that those of us involved in the project decide which to remove and which to keep on our own before someone else comes in and slaps the whole article with a copyvio notice, which seems like its bound to happen, sooner or later. Can we at least start by removing the images which are already represented on other pages (Yuna, Rikku, Paine, et al.)? If there really is no consensus to trim the remaining images, I would at least suggest create a gallery section: it would still be on shaky ground, policy-wise, but it would look a little less... messy. – Seancdaug 03:32, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'm not so sure about the gallery idea, but yes, there's no point in keeping the images that are already being used in other articles. ⇒ JarlaxleArtemis 03:50, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - The reason they are there is to make it easier to find a pic of someone, i.e, this page has pictures (or a thumbnail) of all characters mentioned here at wiki Renmiri 16:45, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- As for the 15 image limit, that was not including the 10 px images. As you can see above, this is a very recent thing that was done to accomodate the Wiki robot's limitations. I feel that dleting the images to avoid a future image deletion is a little like shooting yourself in the foot to avoid others fromm shooting it. Let's wait for the hypothetical copyvio to happen before we fret about it. I don't believe it will happen and I will tell you why: You can see in my talk page that all the images I uploaded have received a lot of scrutiny from the fair use police and the 10 px display was part of the changes they requested, but so far no one told me to delete all Renmiri 16:44, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - My only reason is that if we make the decision now, we're more in control, whereas if we wait until called out on it, we may not get to choose which images stay and which go. While I understand that the images are there to prevent Roomba from getting a little overzealous, I do think that it's inevitable that we're going to get slapped with a copyvio (there's no caveat to the copyright policy that I'm aware that says "only 15 images... unless they're really tiny"). But I'm willing, as you say, to cross that bridge when we come to it (and it may not be for a while yet). What really concerns me, however, is that the images are kind of... well... unsightly at that size. They're so small that it's difficult to tell what you're looking at until you actually load the images. If our primary concern is to keep the bot at bay, might I suggest throwing the images in a <span style="display: none;"> tag? It should still technically show up as being linked, but wouldn't actually be visible on the page, and we can provide a more descriptive text link to the image. Just a suggestion: take it or leave it as you will. – Seancdaug 19:35, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are a genius! <grin> When the inline link was there everyone liked except Roomba. If the hidden div works for Roomba, then we are all set! Renmiri 20:23, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS: I have already changed the FFX2 list, ~~then I'll do the same at the FFX list~~ FFX done too. We must wait 7 days to see if Roomba likes it, but I think we will be ok, as the images do list as being used. Renmiri 21:16, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That looks much nicer! There's a markup problem with Shuyin's entry on the X-2 page though; the three images at the end of the paragraph. I'm not sure what you intended to do with them though, so I won't meddle. >Gamemaker 00:51, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed Renmiri 19:14, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

→ Articles being moved to Wikibooks

It has come to my attention that Renmiri has been working on a Wikibook project called the Illustrated Guide to the world of Spira (FFX and FFX-2). I personally have no problem with the project, a tour guide for Spira is a novel idea. What is concerning to me are his recent decisions regarding the Sphere Break wikipedia article. He has unilaterally blanked and redirected this page, citing fancruft. He subsequently created the same article on Wikibooks.

I believe the Sphere Break article deserves a place on the 'pedia in some form or another. If it is fancruft, trim and/or merge the offending text, instead of effectively deleting the entirety.
I believe the article complements similar articles on Wikipedia such as Blitzball, Tetra Master, and Triple Triad.
I do not wish the fate of the Sphere Break article to become a precedent for the removal of similar articles such as Blitzball, Tetra Master, and Triple Triad.
Wikibooks is a place for non-fiction articles such as textbooks -- definitely not a place for the alleged fancruft. See WB:WIW.
The Wikibook project contains verbatim copies of articles already existing on the 'pedia, such as link and link, which, along with my previous point, put the stability of the project in jeopardy. See WB:WIW.

Basically, I want to bring back the Sphere Break article. Yay or nay? -- Flooch 06:36, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Without going into great detail at this point: agree. >Gamemaker 13:34, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

After merging the Al Bhed page, Yevon and several others I see no reason to keep a page for a minigame that is not even played in FFX only on FFX-2. Sphere Break details belong with FFX-2 Game Walktroughs. There are several of those at GAMEFAQ, including some specific to Sphere Break. Wikipedia does not need to reproduce GAMEFAQ material. What is next, a page for the Here comes the Bride sidequest on FFX-2 ? Another for Sky Slots and one for Gunners Gauntlet, Lupine Chase, Monkey Love, etc.. ? Blitzball is a very novel fictional sport that is played in both games of the series and is so notable that it is being copied by modern pop culture

As for his claim that Wikibooks is a place for non-fiction articles such as textbooks and that I am put the stability of the project in jeopardy, this should be a discussion at Wikibooks IMHO. Come right over, there is tons of work to be done on the FFX and FFX2 pages there. Put your diligence were your mouth is.

For the record, there are several game Walktroughs in Wikibooks, and that is the reason I moved the page that I wrote there . I did it as a courtesy to the article's creator (who had only a page with a title and a single link). Courtesy that is not being returned, and that saddens me. I also resent the implied reference to my other works there: the Sphere Break page at Wikibooks is not part of my current work on Illustrated Guide... as anyone familiar with Wikibooks can quickly see by the naming convention: Final Fantasy X-2/Sphere Break. Renmiri 18:10, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Finally, Gamemaker, what exactly are you agreeing with ? Are you saying that we should have a Sphere Break page here at Wikipedia ? Please clarify, as I find it very odd that after agreeing to the merging of pages about Fayth, Aeons... you now want a page for an unimportant minigame that is not even played on both games of the series Renmiri 18:04, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Renmiri 18:04, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm agreeing to have the Sphere Break article restored, yes, per Flooch's reasons. And, off the top of my head, I didn't explicitly agree to merge those other articles, I simply didn't comment. >Gamemaker 23:30, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The issue in contention here is the notability of the Sphere Break article. And until the policy regarding the inclusion of (non-)fictional "textbooks" on Wikibooks has reached a concensus, I believe Wikipedia is a better repository for this article. Flooch 00:09, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as of now we have 11 pages in Category:Final Fantasy X, Sphere Break included. The only other FF game that has nearly as many pages is FFVII. Honestly, I find it hard to justify merging the 10 pages we have merged recently, if we use Flooch's reasoning. Maybe we should bring them all back then. I'm having a problem with character images on the List of Final Fantasy X-2 characters. Surely a page for Summoner Donna and her boyfriend Bartello is as notorious as Sphere break. I have a couple of pages that I really hated merging, particularly the Al Bhed and the Final Fantasy X-2 Ultimania guide pages. You know what, I like it, let's bring them all back! Renmiri 01:51, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merging and removing are not the same thing. Donna and her boyfriend do not deserve their own articles, as there is already an established list of characters in Final Fantasy X, and to de-merge them would undermine the existence of the list. There is no such list for Final Fantasy minigames, only a category. Flooch 05:29, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sphere Break was not "Removed" there is a mention about it on the FFX-2 page, culture section. That is all that is needed here in an Encyclopedia, and that's all Donna, Shuyin and other FFX related items - a lot more notable than SB - have. In a book about FFX-2 we would expand it. If you don't like Wikibooks, try the FF Wiki at Wikicities. It is a good place for all the detail you want to add.

I fail to see what is the big loss. All you had on the page was 2 lines and a link to the "I hate Sphere Break" application. That can be easily added to the FFX-2 page. All the rest in the page I wrote but then realized it is too much detail for Wikipedia. The 4 sphere break pics that I uploaded can be added to the pictures of sheep page for ffx2 you suggested I create. Renmiri 16:21, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All we had on the page was a well-written article, on par with that of Blitzball, Tetra Master, Triple Triad, which complemented the minigames category. I am not necessarily asking for a revert to the stub. (By the way, one picture would have sufficed.)

I appreciate your arguments, and I can see you are uncompromising on this issue. I still disagree with you, but to be fair, I won't touch your changes unless a new concensus is reached. In the future, please discuss removals of articles from Wikipedia before carrying them out. Flooch 01:25, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I still agree that it should return. Whilst Wikipedia doesn't play the numbers game, I think its reasonable to restore the article notwithstanding further disagreement over the next few days. >Gamemaker 01:35, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

My unmoving position in this issue is based on the wikipedia notbility criteria. As you can see below, when I did the Google test for the first time I did it wrong, and the result - 13,million hits - made me revert my unmovable position. A topic that has millions of hits in Google is certainly notable enough to deserve it's own page. Now I redid the test correctly and SB has less than 15,000 hits, which is much lower than the 225,000 hits we get for "Shuyin" which was just merged. In all honesty and good faith I myself don't see how we can justify merging any of the pages we have merged in the past 2 months if we keep a SB page. Flooch, you can look above the Al Bhed page merge discussion. It was quite a battle. My main concern is: How can we answer Kaplan or other Al Bhed Language fan's complaints about the merge while we let a SB page stay ? How about Shuyin fans ? The truth is there is no answer, if SB is allowed then they all should be allowed. We just open a big can of worms and all the cleanup effort done this past few months will be dismantled page by page... Renmiri

Actually , I did a Google test and found out that ~~Sphere Break is 3 X more popular than Blitzball~~. I'd never guess that! I agree to the page staying now Renmiri 19:08, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Google test results: Results 1 - 10 of about 13,600,000 for sphere break. beats Al Bhed, Shuyin and Blitzball combined results (less than 300,000 for each). Weird!

Nevermind... ( again), the real total is very low Results 1 - 10 of about 14,900 for "sphere break".. The 13 million hits were for the word "Sphere" and the word "Break" on the same article. In that case I stand by the removal, as, as I suspected, the topic is of minor interest and much less notable (at least 10 X less notable) tha the other pages we merged already. Renmiri 19:23, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Google test? It's all well and good but I was looking at the bigger picture... By the way, I would have probably coalesced had you brought these points up before removing the page, twice. Does this sound familar? "Please do not remove the thumbnails until we debate the issue." ~~Why do I feel like such a martyr?~~ Flooch 14:57, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If it is any consolation, I'm sorry if my redirecting the page frustrated you. I should have known better than that, after having 4 of my pages redirected w/o nary a message, just a month ago. I thought I was being "gentle" with my message in your talk page, but obviously you don't feel the same. I will try to do better next time.

Now, can we please move on to other FF pages ? Renmiri 21:23, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hm... while I, of course, never agree with the idea of unilateral decisions, Renmiri's acknowledged her mistake on this one and her reasons were ones that I -- and you too, Flooch? -- find highly valid. And really, in all fairness, I can see why she would have thought that it wouldn't be a problem. FFVII's Nibelheim used to have its own article, and all it said was "The hometown of Cloud and Tifa from FFVII," and I see the Sphere Break page that was there as only slightly more informative of a subject that's not 1/100 as notable.

In terms of notability -- a Wikipedia standard -- I personally can't find a reason to justify a Sphere Break page. Blitzball I can see, and Triple Triad too, and even Tetra Master (some people actually liked this game, and though I don't understand their affection for it, I can't deny that they have it). Those other mini-games were not only extremely popular, but were presented as "the big mini-game" in their respective games.

X-2's got a lot of mini-games, to be honest, and while Sphere Break's the most notable out of the group, it's only barely so. Gunner's Gauntlet is not that far behind it, and really, one could make an argument for oversouling all the games' fiends being the most extensive mini-game. Sphere Break's the only one that actually makes it into the required storyline, I believe (meaning, if you don't do anything more than what you have to so as to get to the end. like Blitzball did in FFX, or Tetra Master in FFIX), but Triple Triad didn't receive such attention in FFVIII, yet it's highly notable and popular among the fandom, so we can't go by storyline-inclusion. Even if we could, if one goes for 100% in X-2 (to get the canon story and ending), they're required to take part in Gunner's Gauntlet, so it'd be somewhat selective of us to exclude it as trivia while regarding Sphere Break as more notable. If anything, Sphere Break's one of the more infamous mini-games in X-2 ("I Hate Sphere Break!" anyone?), and Gunner's Gauntlet was actually better received.

If you agree on those terms, Flooch, and those Renmiri has presented, I'd think it only fair to agree with the merge, even if not the way it occurred. Think of it this way: if after it was un-merged, someone else had brought it up as a merge topic, and they presented the same reasons Renmiri has, and you'd agree with those reasons, then it's really only right to approve the merge in this case as well. This should, after all, be a discussion of the pros and cons of the merge, not the individuals involved with the situation, especially when the mistake made has been acknowledged as such, and on what would fairly be perceived as a non-controversial idea. Any two or three or four people can discuss a subject's characteristics, but when they all walk away and three or four more people come along to discuss it, the subject is still the same.

In summary: I agree with Renmiri's reasoning and her intentions. While she made a mistake, it's certainly not on a grand scale (not like renaming Cloud Strife's page or something), and due to its specific nature, I understand why she made the mistake and see it as a fair one to make, especially since she's acknowledged it as a mistake and apologized for doing so. We've all probably made a bad decision at some point or another (or will at some point in the future; no matter how careful you are, if you're an active editor, you'll slip up and ruffle somebody's feathers; you just have to hope it's going to be a low-key subject like this one), and the best thing to do is to put our focus on the important subject matter, and judge it without argumentum ad hominem, especially when we're in agreement. My two pesos. Ryu Kaze 15:56, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for coming Ryu, and well put; I'll concede defeat on all points. Renmiri, I'll admit I was a little shocked by the talk page, as well as the apparent attempt to circumvent AfD (in my eyes at the time), but I'm satisfied that you were acting on good faith. I've gained a lot through this discussion and I hope to work with you all again. Flooch 17:09, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Me too Flooch, as I said, i should have known better, as I myself was the "victim" of a merge (actually 4 pages) not so long ago. I'm sorry and I hope we will work better in the future! Renmiri 00:18, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Notability isn't judged by the number of hits on a search engine, it's judged by how much valid, encyclopedic content exists in the article. The Shuyin article was merged because its encyclopedic content either already existed in, or was migrated to, other articles. Triple Triad, et al, have articles because (presumably) they have enough notable content to justify themselves, regardless of whether they score 1,000,000 hits on Google or just 10. >Gamemaker 17:57, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think we all would agree on that, Gamemaker, but a test like that can give one a reasonable inference of what kind of notability they're working with. It's by no means a definitive answer, but high or low numbers there can work as one aspect of making a determination. Compare the numbers from say, "the X-Files" with my username. XD

As far as overlap of material goes, in Sphere Break's case, the minimal information that was there is comparable to what's mentioned in the trivia section on the X-2 page, so that situation is actually similar to Shuyin's.

Anyway, glad to see that all is now well here, and that no one's walking away with hard feelings. I hope I was able to help in some way. Ryu Kaze 12:09, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think I must be missing something. How can the parenthesised phrase "a coin-based minigame" (the only reference to Sphere Break in the X-2 Trivia section) be comparable to the information presented here? I'm honestly not trying to flog a dead horse here; if someone gives a valid reason for removing the Sphere Break page then I'll happily concede to it. >Gamemaker 12:43, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, crap. I didn't see all that. I just saw the link further up where there were two lines and then a single link and assumed that's what this whole thing was about. That said, I still do think the decisions that were agreed upon were good, and for much the same reasons. Sphere Break still lacks the notability of Blitzball, Triple Triad, and Tetra Master, even amongst the fanbase, where it is generally reviled. On its own, doesn't seem to warrant its own page when its notability in FFX-2 is debatable against the likes of Gunner's Gauntlet, FFX-2's form of blitzball, and even the monkey matchmaker mini-game (the first being generally well-received, the second being, perhaps, more despised than Sphere Break in comparison to the original form, and the latter being regarded as a pain in the ass, if only because of how trivial it appears).

That said, I wouldn't see a problem with a "Mini-games of Final Fantasy X-2" page, as, together, they amount to a larger level of notability. Even so, I don't see the whole lot of them together as amounting to the level of notability of Blitzball, Tetra Master, or Triple Triad, especially among fan circles, but there's enough relevance amongst the whole lot to warrant it.

The Sphere Break page being as it is, I would only oppose its presence on the grounds that its rather selective to single it out as the more notable mini-game of FFX-2, which it having its own article would indicate, even if that were not the intention. Its level of notability is arguable, so I'd either argue for a X-2 mini-game page instead, or no X-2 mini-game pages. Ryu Kaze 21:50, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A page for Minigames would have to be for all FF games, just like the races and the bestiary pages. I'm not opposed to it if anyone wants to give it a go, I just don't feel I know enough about the other games in the FF series to produce a good page

As for http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sphere_Break&oldid=42442684 I wrote all of it. If that doesn't show you I personally have nothing against Sphere Break and even like the game, then perhaps my Flash version of SB will. But this level of detail for SB is harmful to the project IMHO. As I explained above, how can we possibly justify merging any other page if we put in a page that only 15,000 people in the entire World Wide Web deemed important enough to merit a page. It is a fun minigame, it is just not notable enough to be here. And what is here at Wikipedia is pretty much all there is without my contributions [1]. I'm flattered that you guys like it so much, but I, the author, don't think it belongs here Renmiri 22:05, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I can't argue with any of that. You're right, in that singling out X-2's mini-games for their own page would be much like singling out a single mini-game from X-2 for its own page when the notability is questionable. I now sit 100% on the "no Sphere Break page" side of the fence. Ryu Kaze 23:04, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest I think the point of Wikipedia is being missed here. I'm arguing that an article can still be justified despite not scoring a bucketful of hits on a search engine. Wiki isn't restricted by space; if there is encyclopedic information to be had about a topic, then denying the 10 people who want to read it because no one else is interested is against the spirit of Wikipedia. If you were arguing that the Sphere Break article contained nothing but fancruft then I would agree you had valid concerns, but you're not, you're saying that Google tells you that not enough people are going to read it. If that was the criteria for judging an article's inclusion, then AfD would be a lot busier than it is. >Gamemaker 23:22, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey all. I haven't been part of the discussion and haven't read through it yet so don't know how out of place I would be to say this, but I believe Sphere Break is quite notable (though I'm one of those hated inclusionists). If the article reached a good size of high quality notable text, then there's no reason for it not to be included. There are enough people in the world who like Final Fantasy to want to know about Sphere Break. I base the notability of articles on its content and/or likelihood to someday be useful. If it is made into a useful article it should stay — CuaHL ☺ 23:12, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is not useful as it is, it is redundant. Anyone that has the game knows about core spheres and coins, it's part of the in game tutorial. The only useful info on the whole thing is maybe the link to the I hate SB page.

Well, I think we are spending a lot more time in this page than it merits it. I won't redirect it if you bring it back. But with the caveat that if anyone else uses the SB page as a precedent to keep their pet FF page then both the pet page and the SB page may get deleted, as I can not - and will not - defend keeping it after having merged Al Bhed, Shuyin, Fayth, Yevon, Lenne, Machina and the many other pages merged recently. Renmiri 23:35, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's certainly no denying that it's a good, informative page (good job with that, Ren), and I wouldn't really go out of my way to oppose it being brought back, but I still feel -- on the grounds Ren just mentioned -- that it's a bit of an odd decision in terms of notability, and I still think its notability is questionable in comparison to the other mini-games of X-2, but if it stays, it's no biggie. As long as it's not a stub like it was before, it's not an actual problem, but I still think it's sending the wrong message in terms of notability with X-2's mini-games. Ryu Kaze 16:49, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SB page is back. I'm ignoring it as promised Renmiri 21:36, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kudos to the project

Found at Eyes of FF one of the larger FF Forums http://forums.eyesonff.com/showthread.php?t=82198

Quote: Am I the only one fascinated about the amount of information this has to offer about Final Fantasy? I find it fascinating. Renmiri 19:46, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]